We are studing the determinants of jury verdicts in jury-tried sexual assault cases, as well as the determinants of jurors' individual reactions to defendants and prosecutrices (individuals who testified that they were sexually assaulted). We are studying all cases of forcible sexual assault tried by juries in a large Midwestern city. Data-collection procedures include trial observations, court and prosecutors' records, brief post-trial interviews with judges, and extensive post-trial interviews with jurors on factors which may potentially affect their verdicts and individual reactions to the main trial parties. We anticipate 45 trials during the data-collection period and expect to interview 400-450 jurors. By relating jurors' attitudes and characteristics and their perceptions of victim and defendant characteristics to their verdicts in rape cases, we shift attention away from a relatively narrow concern with the rapist and his victim and toward the societal values that define rape and influence official responses to it. After taking into account the impact of evidence, the conduct of the trial and personal characteristics of the defendant known to influence trial outcomes, we estimate the impact of jurors' own sex-role attitudes and prosecutrices' apparent sex-role conformity on jurors' responses. Although only a small proportion of reported rapes are ultimately tried by jury, jurors' influence extends far beyond the courtroom by affecting various pretrial dispositions. Moreover, as the only amateurs in the criminal-justice system, jurors are the most likely to be influenced by extra-legal factors, including victims' sex-role behavior. We will use multivariate statistical analysis, supplemented by qualitative analyses of observational and interview data to determine how and why jurors reached particular decisions.